Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Papst Licensing v. FujiFilm Corporation, No. 14-1110 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 2, 2015)

Errata Correction sheet to a previously issued opinion
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 14-1110
Decided
February 2, 2015
Judge
Document
Errata
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

February 3, 2015

ERRATA

Appeal No. 2014-1110

IN RE PAPST LICENSING DIGITAL CAMERA

PATENT LITIGATION

PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG,

v.

FUJIFILM CORPORATION, FUJIFILM NORTH

AMERICA CORPORATION (formerly known as

Fujifilm USA, Inc.), HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, JVC COMPANY OF AMERICA, NIKON CORPORATION, NIKON, INC., OLYMPUS CORP., OLYMPUS IMAGING AMERICA INC., PANASONIC

CORPORATION (formerly known as Matsushita

Electric Industrial Co., LTD.), PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA , SAMSUNG OPTO-ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG TECHWIN CO., AND VICTOR COMPANY OF JAPAN,

LTD.,

Decided: February 2, 2015

Precedential Opinion

22 PAPST LICENSING V. FUJIFILM CORPORATION

Please make the following change:

On page two, replace the sentence

JOHN T. BATTAGLIA, Fisch Hoffman Sigler LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

with the following sentence:

JOHN T. BATTAGLIA, Fisch Sigler LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Papst Licensing v. FujiFilm Corporation, No. 14-1110 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 2, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-14-01110-1
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-14-01110-1

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.